Pentagon examining chances of Israeli strike against Iran

Jerusalem Post ^ | 3-13-06 | NATHAN GUTTMAN

[SJackson]

The Pentagon is looking into the possibility of Israel launching a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. In the past months there were several working-level discussions trying to map out the possible scenarios for such an attack, according to administration sources who were briefed on these meetings.

The discussions, which were describes as intelligence-oriented and not policy-oriented, examined the likelihood of an Israeli pre-emptive attack against Iran and the method in which such an attack could be carried out. One of the main questions presented in these discussions was whether Israel would inform the US in advance in case such an attack is to take place and when would such an advance notice be given.

The sources pointed out that it is clear that Israel would have to coordinate with the US forces air control any attempt to fly over Iraq on the way to Iran, if Israel chooses to attack using the shortest route.

Last week, former Israeli Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said in Washington that the West does have a military option against Iran and that a joint US-NATO-Israeli air strike against dozens of nuclear facilities in Iran could set back Teheran's nuclear programs for several years.

The sources stresses that Ya'alon's remarks were not the trigger for the Pentagon consultations about a possible Israeli attack but added that there is a sense in the administration that the Iranian issue is gaining urgency.

The Washington Post reported Monday that the Bush administration has made Iran a top priority issue and that the president and his team had several meetings on the issue to discuss Iran's nuclear plans.

The Pentagon discussions, according to the sources, did not lead to any conclusion regarding the plausibility of an Israeli attack against Iran, nor did it recommend any action by the US.

Israeli and US sources have said in the past weeks that the US did not convey any message to Israel in which it asked to refrain from an attack and has not raised the issue in bilateral discussions with the Israelis. Both countries share intelligence on the situation in Iran and the advance of the nuclear program, but do not discuss - according to sources who took part in bilateral talks - the possibility of using military force to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

The American assumption, according to the administration sources, is that an Israeli decision on attacking Iran is not imminent and that in any case it would not be taken before the Israeli elections, scheduled for March 28.

One of the questions Pentagon analysts are grappling with is how an Israeli attack - if launched - would affect the US and its forces in the region and whether it would force the US to follow with further strikes in order to complete the mission. The US is also discussing what could be the possible avenues of retaliation Iran would take against US's forces and interests in the region.

US Vice President Dick Cheney said last week that all options are "on the table" regarding Iran and on Sunday leading senators pointed out in TV interviews that the US can stop Iran's nuclear program. Senator George Allen (R-VA) said, relating to the question of using military force against Iran, that it is not the preferable route, but "if necessary, it is an option", and Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) stressed that he believed that Iran's nuclear program can be stopped "short of war".

The UN Security Council is expected to take on the Iranian issue this week. During the weekend consultations continued between the US and European representatives and those from Russia and China in attempt to reach an agreement on the language of a Security Council presidential declaration regarding Iran.

The Americans would like to include a clause that would give Iran a 14 day ultimatum to accept the international community's conditions, before moving ahead with sanctions. Western diplomats said Monday that it is not clear if Russia and China would agree to such an ultimatum and speculated that they might insist on a month's period instead of the proposed 14 days.

[luvbach1]

Any ultimatum would not work. It seems clear that Israel would inform the US if it intends to strike. It had better be big enough.

[ronnied]

iran is the last major hurdle for peace in that region, iran has to be stopped & the terrorism will be greatly reduced or stopped altogether...

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking the keyword or topic Israel.

---------------------------

[ketelone]

"iran is the last major hurdle for peace in that region, iran has to be stopped & the terrorism will be greatly reduced or stopped altogether..."

Wrongo. Iran is right smack dab next door to Pakistan. And I promise you, those bad boys are much worse than Iran. But, it seems they have less spine.

Musharraf wont last forever. So something else will have to be done.

[HarmlessLovableFuzzball]

If Mush is taken out from within, at least there would be a legitimate reason to strike Pakistan.

[monkeywrench]

The pakis and mullahcracy are both chicom proxies. When iran goes down, yes, pakistan will become more hostile. The chicoms will help them find their spine.

[fso301]

The ideal strike against Iran would be carried out by kinetic energy weapons.

Href="http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/generaltechnology/df869aa138b84010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html"> Read More

[fso301]

Sorry for the bad link.

Read More

[Tulsa Ramjet]

"Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) stressed that he believed that Iran's nuclear program can be stopped "short of war". "

What a blow hard. WHAT'S YOUR PLAN SMILING BOY!!???? Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk. Never willing to put out anything that anyone can debate. COME ON SMILING BOY, WHAT DO YOU GOT??? Man, I can't stand these rhetorical slack *sses!

[lesser_satan]

bump

[RightWhale]

Israel would have to coordinate with the US forces air control

This is more than coordination. Israel might well overfly Syria wihout permission, but Iraq is a different matter. Permission to overfly Iraq would be nearly equivalent to US participation, and the US might participate to various degrees anywhere from being ready to engage Iranian coastal facilities that threaten the Strait of Hormuz to neutralizing Iranian air defenses or neutralizing Iran's offensive missile capability or Iran's nuclear installations. Any level of participation would result in nearly the same international diplomatic results, but both RNC and DNC parties are gearing up for the strike.

[Salem]

Messin' with the mad, mad Mullah's minds right here on Free Republic.

Ahmadinejad has got to pause every time he hears a jet fly over head.  

---

If you'd like to be on or off this
Christian Supporters of Israel ping list,
please FR mail me ~
    
MikeFromFR ~
There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had
spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass. (Joshua 21:45)
Letter To The President In Support Of Israel ~
'Final Solution,' Phase 2 ~
Warnings ~

"The West has given more significance to the myth of the genocide of the Jews, even more significant than God, religion, and the prophets...."—Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
The Holocaust Chronicle ~



"Palestine is the wrong name for their State. It should be called Anarchy."—FReeper sgtbono2002
"Then let's wait and see what the Arabs do after they take Gaza. There's nothing like Arab reality to break up a Jewish fantasy."—FReeper Noachian
A student told his professor he was going to "Palestine" to "fight for freedom, peace and justice,"—Orwellian leftist code words that mean "murder Jews."
The Nature Of Bruce ~

[Ciexyz]

By all means, let's go thru the U.N. to convince the Iranians to become good world citizens. (/sarcasm off)

[rogue yam]

I wish Israel could and would take care of Iran's nukes but I just don't think they have the resources to accomplish the task. Iran's nuke sites (~40?) are spread out and far from Israel. All Israeli aircraft would have to take off from and return to bases in Israel. Mid-air refueling would be required. Overflight of hostile airspace would be required. (I'm counting Jordan as hostile here, and that's the long way around.) Once over Iran, any intruder will have to deal with non-trivial air defenses. There would likely be no element of surprise. It is a tough assignment, and Israel is very poorly situated and underequipped to carry it out. My estimation of the bottom line is that either Iran stops building nukes on their own volition (ha!) or else the United States (perhaps with largely symbolic contribution from our allies) takes the Iranian nuke sites out. I don't like it, but that's the way it's gotta be, I'm afraid.

[anonymoussierra]

"Get ready." Thank you all time is time

[M. Espinola]

The tyrants of Tehran are on borrowed time, especially post Passover.

[ronnied]

"iran is the last major hurdle for peace in that region, iran has to be stopped & the terrorism will be greatly reduced or stopped altogether..."

Wrongo. Iran is right smack dab next door to Pakistan. And I promise you, those bad boys are much worse than Iran. But, it seems they have less spine.


and pakistan is next door to india etc. in the region of the middle east iran is the major problem, take it out & the rest will be like dominos....

[Convert from ECUSA]

" Ahmadinejad has got to pause every time he hears a jet fly over head."

Must be h*** for him whenever he drives near Tehran airport! Heeheehee. Might be fun for us and Israel to send military jets over Tehran and have them go supersonic and provide sonic booms. Nothing else. Get ole Haman all nervous!